Trouble logging in?If you can't remember your password or are having trouble logging in, you will have to reset your password. If you have trouble resetting your password (for example, if you lost access to the original email address), please do not start posting with a new account, as this is against the forum rules. If you create a temporary account, please contact us right away via Forum Support, and send us any information you can about your original account, such as the account name and any email address that may have been associated with it.

Well, Halo basically did a few things back in its day that were quite extraordinary.

1. Rebounding health bar. This was the first, or at least, one of the first, games to use a rebounding shield in conjunction with a normal health bar. Of course, this is now the norm for a lot of FPS games.

2. One-button grenade access and melee access. It's a lot faster than the old model, where you had to specifically select the grenade/melee in your inventory before using i.

3. Good AI. For it's time, anyways. Reviews gushed over Grunts running away when an Elite got killed. Then again, back when Half Life was released, people went crazy over the fact that the special ops troops threw grenades at you when you weren't in their line of fire.

4. Expansive multiplayer. Lots of features for its time, and really, even now, still has a very full-featured multiplayer compared to other games.

Oh, and it was for the XBox. Not that many great games for the XBox when Halo came out. If it had come out on the PC or PS2, chances are it wouldn't have received nearly the same amount of success.

I'm not a big fan of the Halo series--there are way too many flaws with it, and the newer iterations are nothing compared to contemporary PC FPS, but it does have some good things about it.

Halo def. wasn't the first on any of there categories. Atleast most of these features have appeared in other fps games, although maybe not all at once. I have to agree that the game has better AI than alot of other FPS game, but it's features have been used before. Of course I'm talking more about playing on the computer rather than console games. I'm not sure if that makes a diff.

Halo def. wasn't the first on any of there categories. Atleast most of these features have appeared in other fps games, although maybe not all at once. I have to agree that the game has better AI than alot of other FPS game, but it's features have been used before. Of course I'm talking more about playing on the computer rather than console games. I'm not sure if that makes a diff.

Well, you're right, Halo certainly didn't invent anything, but what it did, it did very well for its time, and it definitely was the game to popularize a lot of things.

I'm not sure for you guys, but for me the most disappointing game is the ones that started out excellent but somehow loses my interest in the middle. One prime candidate would have to be Yggdra Union, which I really like, then got too complicated. I never expected it to be an easy ride, but nevertheless, it got too incredibly hard (hard = random, changing victory conditions + Gulcasa + the fact that no weapons are strong vs. scythes + state guard + if you miss out on this item you actually missed out on seven) and I eventually lost my interest.

I know I shouldn't revive this ancient thread but I don't think moderators agree if I made new one either.

Harvest Moon: Back to Nature is one of the best game ever made for PS1(some says the Nintendo 64 version is better than BtN but I never played that version) even in today's standards. It had tons of customizations and upgrades but it sequels on PS2 are nowhere as good as BtN. Save the Homeland have good graphics for its time with good use of cell-shaded but unfortunately it also stripped down what BtN is known for like marriage, home expansions and worst of all you have only a year to do all things rights. In StH you were 'tasked' to find all 9 endings which all of them are character-related. While making friends is fun but I want what HM games are famous for: farming. To sum it all StH was playable but it taken away most aspects what make BtN good.

Even worse than StH is A Wonderful Life. Originally made for Gamecube and it wasn't meant to be played in PS2 but due to popular demands from PS2-owning fans, Natsume decided to port that game to PS2. What happened next is a big pile of mess, literally. Graphics are ugly and there's trouble with framerate as everything else seems to slow. While the town is much smaller than Mineral Town in BtN but my character walk way too slow and I was forced to ride on horse anywhere I want to go and even that was too slow. Why they don't use the same cell-shading technique like they did in StH? While it re-introduced marriage and house expansions but it already too late to heal that damage. While there are some HM sequels and spiritual descendants in GBA and Nintendo DS but HM is already dead to me after AWL.

Just curious as to why you found it disappointing. Mechanics changes? The ending? (edit: I'm just now recalling there was an uproar over the ending lol) I actually disliked the first game in the series the most. (though I kind of despise the series as a whole simply because it replaced KotOR)

Been a long time since I spoke about why I hate/dislike me3, but here:

The ending wasn't great, but that isn't why it was so disappointing to me. I put a lot of time into mass effect 1/2, one of my favorite games is mass effect 2 it had a lot going for it(Story,replayability,soundtrack,setting and characters all great). When I got me3 I could tell the combat had been improved, that was needed. Further a long I noticed the soundtrack was decent, but nothing special so I was disappointed in that.

Then the first major flaw in the game hit me and that was that my shepard who's a complete renegade badass is having dreams about some child who died, this really ticks me off because the developers force it on you(if I was good then I would understand, but it happens either way). Which continues throughout the game, choices just don't matter. You cant save all your crew, they just die in a different way. A perfect playthrough in the previous games would reward you, you get to save all your team mates, in me3 it doesn't mean anything. Most of the new crew are just meat heads with no personality, like the Freddie Prince Jr guy. The story just felt so much more linear and the writers just didn't give any real thought to it.

Another problem was that they attached a multiplayer to the game, which ok it was fun, but it became a selling point for a game which was previously a solo rpg and I felt they just added it to make the demographic bigger, make more cash for EA. Lastly they removed nearly all the exploration the previous games had, I understand that the resource finding was boring, but they didnt even substitute it for something else. Then they milked the game with a load of dlc which didn't fix much, I know that me1/2 had a lot dlc, but at least it added fleshed out characters and decent new storylines.u

I just felt like Bioware gave fans the middle finger. Anyway sorry for grammar or spellings, I am tired and typing this out on a wii u screen

I dont think i have any games that i would personally call most disappointing but there's a few popular series that definitely got a bummer from me.

Diablo 2 - I was addicted to Diablo 1 but Diablo 2 was kinda of a bummer to me actually. Mostly because the magic of finding a brand new game is lost to me by then and the moment when you ran into the first Butcher was really scary and memorable (to a younger me). Not to mention the tension of losing all your equipment if you failed your corpse run can be pretty intense. D2 LoD is probably a lot of people's favourite but personally, I still find Diablo 1 a lot more memorable.

Mass Effect - It's not a bad game but just that i was expecting more RPG element from it considering Bioware's pedigree. ME is kinda RPG lite + FPS lite. The characters wasn't as memorable as Dragon's Age and the whole planetary exploration wasn't as engaging as i was hoping it to be.

FF13 - I didn't finish FF12, that game lost me in it's combat mechanic and lack of character. I was hoping FF13 will salvage it. It only disappoint me further.

GTA4 - GTA3 San Andreas and Vice City was so good and had the right amount of character, quirkiness and charm to it. GTA4 while graphically impressive was a chore to play through.

Dragon Age 2 but only because it's such a letdown from the previous series. I knew it was bad before i played it so had no expectation from it in the first place. Cant disappoint when you had no hope for it i guess.

Most disappointing game for me, but only partially is Guild Wars 2. Don't get me wrong, I loved the story, I loved the graphics, I loved the weapon-skill visuals, and I loved the vastness of the game. However, their gear system disappointed me. I've always been an MMOPGer and I'm 100% accustomed to running raids/dungeons/instances for gear that will have better stats and make your character stronger. GW2 gear doesn't work that way. Just about all the end game have the same stats, just a different set that looks visually different. Granted, there is a crit set, a luck set, a tank set, etc but the tank set from one dungeon vs the tank set of another dungeon has the exact same stats just looks visually different. I learned along the way that the game ran on "prestige." Sure, you could brag that you have all 10 dungeon sets, but as a character, it makes you no different than another in terms of visuals. I play MMOs to make a powerful character, one that is stronger than another in PvE and PvP. Although, a lot of the gear does look bad@ss, I just wish they gave bad@ss stats >_<

**note, I haven't played in over a year so I don't know any changes they added to gear and whatnot**